remove_statetree_parameter

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as error handling, side effects, or permissions. However, the operation is straightforward (removing a parameter), so score is adequate.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise with no unnecessary words. It gets straight to the point with the action and parameters.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity and the existence of an output schema, the description is mostly complete. However, it does not mention any prerequisites or the effect of removing a parameter that might be in use.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0% (no param descriptions in schema). The description adds meaning by specifying 'asset_path: Content path to the StateTree asset' and 'name: Parameter name to remove', compensating for the schema gap.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'Remove' and the resource 'tree-level parameter by name'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'add_statetree_parameter' and other remove operations.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides arguments but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'remove_statetree_state' or 'remove_statetree_node'. Usage is implied but not explicitly contextualized.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.